Connecting Land Promise to Leviticus 18:28

Introduction

This study will examine the concept of the land promise, which many evangelical Christians interpret the event in 1948—the establishment of the state of Israel as a prophetic occurrence. This belief is rooted in the promise made to Abram in Genesis 12:1-3, leading to the view that this was a significant fulfillment for contemporary Jews as recognized in the modern context.

We will also look at Amos 2:7 and many other verses that will test the concept of the land promise. However, in connecting the sexual immorality that will be cited from scripture, we then will be able to make sense of the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., the Diaspora, and if there is any legitimacy in the newly established modern state of Israel, and then give points to raise on important theological and historical questions. Portions of this study will be structured to address and give clarity within the framework of scripture when the argument raised is for the land promise to Israel.

The graphic image at the top for this post depicts Leviticus 18, however, the focus will not be entirely on all verses of this chapter, rather we will be looking at what would come if these acts of sexual immorality are practiced by Israel. — Here is what God says to Moses:

  • Lev. 18:2-3 –” Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the LORD your God. After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances.”

When, and if “the doings of the land of Canaan” are practiced, God makes His final words at the end of chapter 18 of Leviticus, which reads as follows:

  • Lev. 18:24-30 — Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you: And the land is defiled: therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments, and shall not commit [any] of these abominations; [neither] any of your own nation, nor any stranger that sojourneth among you: (For all these abominations have the men of the land done, which [were] before you, and the land is defiled;) That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that [were] before you. For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit [them] shall be cut off from among their people. Therefore shall ye keep mine ordinance, that [ye] commit not [any one] of these abominable customs, which were committed before you, and that ye defile not yourselves therein: I [am] the LORD your God.“

Connection Between Leviticus 18:28 & The Destruction of The Temple In 70 A.D.

There is a significant connection between Leviticus 18:28, the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., and the idea that Israel’s claim to the land is contingent on their covenantal relationship with God.

1. Leviticus 18:28: Conditional Occupation of the Land

  • Leviticus 18:28 (KJV): “That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you.”
    • This verse establishes a principle: the land God gave to Israel was not theirs unconditionally. It was tied to obedience to God’s laws, including moral purity and rejection of idolatry.
    • The Canaanites were expelled for their sins, and God warned Israel that the same fate would befall them if they followed similar practices.

Key Point

  • Occupation of the land under the old covenant was conditional upon faithfulness to God. When the Israelites repeatedly disobeyed, God expelled them, first through the Assyrian and Babylonian exiles, and finally with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.

2. Christ’s Judgment and the Destruction of the Temple

  • Matthew 23:37-38 (KJV): “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem… Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.”
  • Matthew 24:2 (KJV): “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
    • Jesus directly foretold the destruction of the Temple as a judgment against Israel’s rejection of Him as the Messiah and their continuation of practices that defiled the covenant.

Why Did Christ Allow the Temple to Be Destroyed?

  • The Temple symbolized the old covenant system, which was fulfilled and rendered obsolete by Christ’s sacrificial death:
    • Hebrews 8:13 (KJV): “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”
  • By rejecting Christ, Israel clung to an outdated system of rituals and oral traditions, which Jesus often condemned:
    • Mark 7:8-9 (KJV): “For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men.”
  • The destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. marked the end of the old covenant and the judgment for Israel’s unfaithfulness.

3. Connection Between Leviticus 18:28 and 70 A.D.

  • The principle in Leviticus 18:28 finds its ultimate expression in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 A.D.:
    • Just as the Canaanites were “spued out” of the land for their defilements, so too were the Israelites for their persistent disobedience, rejection of the Messiah, and idolatry of human traditions.
    • The moral and covenantal conditions that allowed Israel to inhabit the land were violated, fulfilling the warning of Leviticus.

4. Why Does Modern Israel Have No Legitimate Claim?

  • Rejection of Christ: The new covenant, established through Christ, supersedes the old covenant. Under this covenant, faith in Christ is the only way to receive God’s blessings, including any claim to the land.
    • Romans 9:6-8 (KJV): “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.”
    • True Israel is spiritual, defined by faith in Christ, not by ethnicity or physical land.
  • No Covenant Basis: The modern state of Israel, being largely secular and rejecting Christ, does not fulfill the covenantal requirements of Leviticus or the new covenant in Christ. As such, they cannot claim the land as a divine right.

God’s Conditional Promises

  • God’s promises to Abraham about the land were ultimately fulfilled in Christ, not in a perpetual national claim:
    • Galatians 3:16 (KJV): “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made… And to thy seed, which is Christ.”
  • Any modern claims to the land are political, not biblical.

5. Theological Implications for Today

God’s Judgment and Blessing

  • God’s actions in 70 A.D. show that He does not bless unfaithfulness or rebellion. Modern Israel’s immorality, secularism, and rejection of Christ place them outside the blessings of God’s covenant.

The Church as True Israel

  • The Church, composed of all who believe in Christ, is now the true “Israel of God”:
    • Galatians 6:15-16 (KJV): “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”

Support for Modern Israel

  • Supporting modern Israel unconditionally, despite their rejection of Christ and immoral practices, is inconsistent with biblical teaching. God’s promises are now fulfilled in Christ, not in a physical nation:
    • John 18:36 (KJV): “My kingdom is not of this world.”

Conclusion

The destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. and the dispersion of the Jewish people reflect the principle in Leviticus 18:28—the land would “spue out” those who defile it. Under the new covenant, God’s blessings, including any claim to the land, are only available through faith in Christ. Modern Israel, as a largely secular state that rejects Christ and promotes practices contrary to God’s law, has no legitimate biblical claim to the land.

This underscores the importance of understanding God’s covenants and rejecting the misinterpretation that the modern political state of Israel fulfills biblical prophecy.

Additional Leviticus Connections

1. Leviticus 18:28 and the Old Covenant Context

  • Leviticus 18:28 is part of the Mosaic Covenant, where God explicitly tied the Israelites’ possession of the land to their obedience:
    • “That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it, as it spued out the nations that were before you.”
    • This principle of conditional occupation meant that disobedience (idolatry, immorality, etc.) would lead to expulsion, as it did for the Canaanites before them.
  • Israel repeatedly broke this covenant, leading to their exile during the Assyrian and Babylonian periods. Ultimately, the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. fulfilled Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:2 and symbolized the final judgment on the old covenant system.

2. The Rejection of Christ and the Old Covenant’s End

  • Jesus repeatedly rebuked the Pharisees and religious leaders for their hypocrisy and legalism, which He referred to as “traditions of men”:
    • Mark 7:6-8: “This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
  • Jesus declared judgment on Jerusalem for rejecting Him as the Messiah:
    • Matthew 23:37-38: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee… Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.”
  • With Christ’s sacrificial death, the old covenant was fulfilled and replaced by the new covenant prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-34:
    • “I will make a new covenant… not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers… I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts.”
  • The book of Hebrews affirms this:
    • Hebrews 8:13: “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”

3. Modern Israel and the Land Question

  • The return of Jews to the land and the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948 is often interpreted differently by various theological perspectives:
    • Dispensationalists see it as a fulfillment of prophecy and a precursor to end-times events.
    • Covenantal theologians, however, argue that the promises to Abraham are fulfilled in Christ and His Church, not in a geopolitical state.
  • Scripture indicates that the physical land was never the ultimate focus of God’s promises:
    • Romans 4:13: “For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.”
    • The ultimate inheritance is spiritual, encompassing the whole world, not limited to a specific territory.
  • The current state of Israel largely rejects Christ as the Messiah, continuing in rebellion against God. 1 John 2:22 describes such a position:
    • “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.”

4. Theological Implications of Their Return

If God allowed the Israelites to be expelled for disobedience under the old covenant, how could He restore the land to them under the new covenant, where faith in Christ is central? Key points include:

  • God’s Faithfulness to His Promises:
    • The land promises find their ultimate fulfillment in Christ, not in a national or ethnic restoration to a specific territory.
    • Galatians 3:16: “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.”
  • The Rejection of Christ:
    • Without faith in Christ, any restoration to the land is not a fulfillment of God’s promises but a political event.
    • John 14:6: “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

5. Summation

The destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. marked the definitive end of the old covenant system. The current state of Israel cannot claim divine right to the land while rejecting Christ and His covenant. Instead, the promises of God are fulfilled in Christ and extended to all who believe, Jew and Gentile alike, forming a new spiritual Israel.

The question of modern Israel’s legitimacy as a “restoration” must be examined through the lens of the new covenant. As Paul wrote in Romans 9:6:

  • “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel.”

This means true “Israel” is defined not by ethnicity or land but by faith in Christ. Any claims to the land apart from Him are political, not spiritual.

Expanding The Study

Let’s expand on what’s been addressed up to this point, even though we will repeat some of what’s been outlined already. Therefore, this will show how the church is to be consistent in the biblical narrative. God’s promises are conditional upon faith and obedience, culminating in Christ and the new covenant. Expanding on the comments highlighted already will provide further clarity and addresses the error of unconditional support for modern Israel by many evangelical churches.

1. “The current state of Israel cannot claim divine right to the land while rejecting Christ and His covenant.”

Biblical Basis

  • The old covenant, which tied Israel’s possession of the land to obedience to the Mosaic Law, was fulfilled and replaced by the new covenant through Christ.
    • Matthew 5:17: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”
    • Hebrews 8:13: “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.”
  • Under the new covenant, inheritance is no longer based on ethnicity or geography but on faith in Christ.
    • Galatians 3:28-29: “There is neither Jew nor Greek… And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

Rejection of Christ and Covenant Implications

  • The modern state of Israel is predominantly secular, with a large portion of the population rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. Without faith in Christ, there is no claim to the promises of God:
    • John 14:6: “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
    • 1 John 2:23: “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.”
  • The concept of divine right is inseparable from the covenant. Since the covenant is fulfilled in Christ, any claim to divine blessing apart from Him is invalid:
    • Romans 9:6-8: “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”

Application to Modern Israel

  • The modern state’s actions and policies cannot be justified biblically by appeals to divine right if those actions reject God’s commandments and the Messiah.
  • Supporting Israel “no matter what” ignores the clear teaching of Scripture that faith, not ethnicity or land, is the basis of God’s covenant blessings.

2. “If God allowed the Israelites to be expelled for disobedience under the old covenant, how could He restore the land to them under the new covenant, where faith in Christ is central?”

Biblical Basis

  • The Old Testament repeatedly shows that disobedience resulted in expulsion from the land:
    • Leviticus 18:28: “That the land spue not you out also, when ye defile it.”
    • Deuteronomy 28:63-64: “And ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it. And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people.”
  • The exile and destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. fulfilled these warnings under the old covenant. Jesus explicitly foretold this judgment:
    • Matthew 24:2: “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
    • Luke 19:43-44: “For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee… and shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.”

Centrality of Faith in Christ

  • The new covenant fundamentally shifts the relationship with God from land and law to Christ and faith:
    • Romans 10:4: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”
    • Hebrews 11:16: “[The patriarchs] desired a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.”
  • If God expelled Israel for disobedience under the old covenant, it is inconsistent with His character and Word to restore them to the land under the new covenant without repentance and faith in Christ:
    • Acts 3:19-20: “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.”

Modern Implications

  • Many Christians argue that the 1948 establishment of Israel is a fulfillment of prophecy. However, true restoration to God’s promises requires repentance and faith, not political maneuvering or military power.
  • The absence of faith in Christ among most modern Israelis raises serious questions about interpreting their return to the land as a divine act.

3. The Church’s Role and Responsibility

  • Unconditional Support Contradicts Scripture:
    • The belief that Christians must support Israel unconditionally ignores both the justice and faithfulness of God. Romans 11:22 reminds us of the balance of God’s character: “Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.”
    • Supporting injustice or sin in the name of biblical prophecy is a misapplication of Scripture.
  • Paul’s Warning:
    • Paul warns against ethnic pride or favoritism, stating that both Jews and Gentiles must come to God through Christ:
      • Romans 11:20-23: “Thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.”
  • Christ’s Teachings:
    • Jesus condemned hypocrisy and injustice, whether practiced by Jews or Gentiles. His message of love and truth applies universally, and the Church is called to uphold His teachings:
      • Matthew 23:23: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith.”

Summation

The belief in unconditional support for modern Israel contradicts the clear teachings of Scripture and the centrality of Christ in God’s covenant. While Christians are called to love all people, including Jews, this love does not require blind allegiance to a political state. True support must align with God’s justice, mercy, and truth as revealed in Christ.

The Church must return to Scripture, recognize the fulfillment of God’s promises in Christ, and challenge theological positions that defy biblical teaching. As Paul wrote in Galatians 6:14-16, the true Israel of God is not defined by ethnicity or geography but by the cross of Christ and the new creation it brings.

Amos Commentary by Albert Barnes

Albert Barnes, in his commentary on Amos 2:7, addresses the phrase, “a man and his father will go in unto the same maid, to profane my holy name,” highlighting the grievous nature of the sin and its implications.

Barnes’ Analysis:

  • Literal Immorality: Barnes interprets this act as a literal instance of sexual immorality, where both a father and his son engage in relations with the same young woman. Such behavior flagrantly violates the moral and social laws established in the Mosaic covenant.
  • Profaning God’s Holy Name: This act is not merely a personal sin but a public offense that desecrates God’s holy name. By engaging in such immoral conduct, especially within a community identified with God’s covenant, they bring dishonor to God Himself. Barnes emphasizes that such actions cause the name of God to be blasphemed among the Gentiles, as the people who are called by His name act in ways that are abhorrent even to pagan nations.
  • Violation of the Law: While the specific act described in Amos may not be directly legislated against in the Mosaic Law, it embodies the kind of sexual immorality and exploitation that the Law condemns. Barnes notes that the Law forbids uncovering the nakedness of close relatives and engaging in sexual relations with a father’s wife or a son’s wife (Leviticus 18:8, 15). The behavior described in Amos reflects a blatant disregard for the sanctity of family relationships and the moral order established by God.
  • Social Injustice and Exploitation: Barnes also connects this immoral act to the broader context of social injustice addressed by Amos. The exploitation of a maid, likely a servant or someone of low social standing, underscores the abuse of power and the oppression of the vulnerable, themes prevalent throughout the prophetic denunciations in Amos.

Conclusion:

Albert Barnes’ commentary on this passage underscores the severity of the sin committed by the Israelites, highlighting how such acts of immorality and exploitation not only violate God’s laws but also profane His holy name. This behavior exemplifies the moral decay and social injustice that the prophet Amos vehemently condemns, calling the people to repentance and a return to righteous living.

Amos & Leviticus Addressed Concurrently

Amos 2:7 and Leviticus 18 are addressing similar issues of sexual immorality and exploitation, though they may differ slightly in context and emphasis. Let’s examine both passages to see how they relate.

Amos 2:7

  • Amos 2:7 (KJV): “That pant after the dust of the earth on the head of the poor, and turn aside the way of the meek: and a man and his father will go in unto the same maid, to profane my holy name.”
    • This verse is part of a larger condemnation of Israel’s social injustices, idolatry, and immorality.
    • The specific phrase “a man and his father will go in unto the same maid” points to an act of gross sexual immorality and abuse, likely involving either temple prostitution or the exploitation of a servant or slave girl.

Literal Interpretation

  • The act described is likely literal and refers to a violation of sexual purity laws. This type of behavior would directly profane God’s holy name because it:
    • Defied God’s moral law (e.g., prohibitions against incest and sexual immorality).
    • Exploited the vulnerable (the “maid” mentioned here could be a servant or someone of low social standing).
    • Reflected broader corruption in Israel’s society, blending immorality with idolatry and injustice.

Leviticus 18: Prohibitions Against Sexual Immorality

  • Leviticus 18 outlines God’s laws against a variety of sexual sins, including:
    • Incest: “Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father’s wife” (Leviticus 18:8).
    • Prohibited relationships: “Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter” (Leviticus 18:17).
    • General immorality: “Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you” (Leviticus 18:24).

Connection to Amos 2:7

  • The scenario in Amos 2:7 aligns with the general principles outlined in Leviticus 18. If a father and son were engaging in sexual relations with the same woman, it would:
    • Violate the sanctity of family relationships.
    • Be an abomination according to Levitical law.
    • Reflect the Canaanite practices God explicitly condemned and warned against.

Broader Implications

  • Profaning God’s Holy Name: Sexual immorality, particularly when committed by God’s covenant people, was seen as a direct affront to God’s holiness:
    • Leviticus 20:3: “I will set my face against that man… because he hath defiled my sanctuary, and profaned my holy name.”
  • Social and Spiritual Corruption: Such behavior often accompanied idolatry and exploitation, as seen in Amos’ broader critique of Israel:
    • Amos 2:6-8: The people sold the righteous for silver, oppressed the poor, and profaned God’s name through immorality and greed.

Summary

  • Amos 2:7 refers to literal acts of sexual immorality and exploitation, closely aligned with the prohibitions in Leviticus 18.
  • These actions not only violated God’s moral laws but also symbolized Israel’s broader spiritual unfaithfulness and corruption.
  • Both passages demonstrate God’s intolerance for such sins and His judgment against nations or individuals who defile His holy name through immoral and exploitative behavior.

Observations of broader issue of immorality in modern Israel raises critical questions as well about the theological claim that the modern state of Israel is divinely ordained or blessed by God. This connection emphasizes that God’s laws were not merely about personal morality but about reflecting His holiness and justice in every aspect of life.

Israelite Acts of Idolatry & Immorality

The Israelites committed acts of idolatry, immorality, and rebellion against God repeatedly throughout their history. The Bible provides numerous accounts of these sins, illustrating their failure to remain faithful to God’s covenant. Below are some key examples with corresponding scriptures:

1. Golden Calf at Mount Sinai

  • Exodus 32:1-6: While Moses was on Mount Sinai receiving the law, the Israelites made a golden calf and worshiped it, saying, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.”
    • This act of idolatry occurred shortly after they had witnessed God’s deliverance from Egypt, demonstrating their quick rebellion.

2. Worship of Baal of Peor

  • Numbers 25:1-3: While in Moab, the Israelites were seduced into immorality and idolatry with the Moabite women, joining in the worship of Baal of Peor.
    • “And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel.”

3. Rebellion During the Period of the Judges

  • Judges 2:11-13: After the death of Joshua, the Israelites repeatedly turned to idolatry by worshiping the Baals and Ashtaroth.
    • “And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim: And they forsook the Lord God of their fathers.”
  • The entire book of Judges chronicles cycles of sin, judgment, repentance, and deliverance.

4. Idolatry Under King Solomon

  • 1 Kings 11:4-8: Solomon, influenced by his foreign wives, built high places for idol worship and turned his heart away from the Lord.
    • “For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods.”
    • This act contributed to the eventual division of the kingdom.

5. The Golden Calves of Jeroboam

  • 1 Kings 12:28-30: Jeroboam, the first king of the northern kingdom of Israel, set up golden calves in Bethel and Dan to prevent the people from going to Jerusalem to worship.
    • “Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel.”
    • This established idolatry as a central practice in the northern kingdom.

6. Wicked Kings and National Idolatry

  • Ahab and Jezebel: Ahab, under the influence of Jezebel, introduced Baal worship on a national scale.
    • 1 Kings 16:30-33: “And Ahab… reared up an altar for Baal in the house of Baal, which he had built in Samaria.”
  • The prophet Elijah confronted this idolatry in the dramatic showdown on Mount Carmel (1 Kings 18:16-40).

7. Child Sacrifice and High Places

  • 2 Kings 17:7-17: The northern kingdom was exiled because of their persistent idolatry and immorality, including child sacrifice and worshiping at high places.
    • “And they caused their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire, and used divination and enchantments.”
  • 2 Chronicles 28:1-4: King Ahaz of Judah also engaged in idolatry and sacrificed his children in fire.

8. Idolatry in the Southern Kingdom

  • 2 Kings 21:1-9: Manasseh, king of Judah, led the nation into idolatry, even setting up idols in the Temple.
    • “And he made his son pass through the fire, and observed times, and used enchantments, and dealt with familiar spirits and wizards: he wrought much wickedness in the sight of the Lord.”

9. Ezekiel’s Vision of Idolatry

  • Ezekiel 8:5-16: Ezekiel is shown a vision of idolatry occurring within the Temple itself, including women weeping for Tammuz and men worshiping the sun.
    • “Then said he unto me, Hast thou seen this, O son of man? Is it a light thing to the house of Judah that they commit the abominations which they commit here?”

10. Post-Exilic Idolatry

  • Even after returning from exile, the people continued to struggle with sin and rebellion. Malachi rebukes the post-exilic community for their unfaithfulness:
    • Malachi 1:6-14: The priests were offering polluted sacrifices and dishonoring God.

Summary

The Israelites’ acts of idolatry and immorality were persistent and pervasive, leading to God’s judgment, including exile and destruction. These sins demonstrate humanity’s inability to uphold the covenant, pointing to the need for a new covenant fulfilled in Christ:

  • Jeremiah 31:31-34: “I will make a new covenant… not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers.”
  • Romans 3:23: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

Their failures highlight God’s patience and the ultimate hope of redemption through Jesus.

Immorality of Tel Aviv, Israel

Tel Aviv and the broader issue of immorality in modern Israel raises critical questions about the theological claim that the modern state of Israel is divinely ordained or blessed by God.

1. The Issue of Open Immorality

Tel Aviv’s Reputation

  • Tel Aviv is widely regarded as one of the most LGBTQ-friendly cities in the world, often hosting events such as pride parades that celebrate lifestyles contrary to biblical morality.
  • This public endorsement of practices condemned in Scripture raises significant concerns, especially for those who view modern Israel as a God-ordained nation.

Biblical Stance on Homosexuality

  • Leviticus 18:22 (KJV): “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”
  • Romans 1:26-27 (KJV): “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections… men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”
  • Both Old and New Testaments clearly condemn homosexual acts as contrary to God’s design for human relationships and moral order.

Parallels to Sodom and Gomorrah

  • The public and celebratory nature of such practices in modern Israel is reminiscent of the moral depravity of Sodom and Gomorrah:
    • Genesis 19:4-5 (KJV): “The men of Sodom… called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.”
    • Jude 1:7 (KJV): “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them… giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

Rebellion Against God

  • Public parades and celebrations flaunting sin “in God’s face” are not only a rejection of His law but also a direct affront to His holiness. Such actions invite judgment rather than blessing.

2. God’s Historical Response to National Sin

Judgment on Israel

  • The Old Testament repeatedly records how God judged Israel for its immorality and idolatry:
    • 2 Kings 17:18 (KJV): “Therefore the Lord was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight.”
    • God allowed both the northern kingdom (Israel) and the southern kingdom (Judah) to be conquered and exiled for their rebellion.

Principle of God’s Holiness

  • God’s holiness demands that He does not excuse or overlook sin, especially among those who claim to be His people:
    • Amos 3:2 (KJV): “You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.”

The Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

  • The rejection of Christ as the Messiah and continued rebellion against God’s moral laws culminated in the destruction of the Temple, marking the end of the old covenant system. This judgment illustrates that God does not tolerate unrepentant sin.

3. The Theological Question: Why Would God Bless This?

No Scriptural Basis for Blessing Sin

  • The idea that God would restore the land to a people who reject His Son, promote sin, and live in open rebellion is inconsistent with Scripture:
    • Isaiah 59:2 (KJV): “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.”
    • The blessings of God are contingent upon repentance and faith, not ethnicity or historical claims to land.

God’s Promises Are Fulfilled in Christ

  • The land promises made to Abraham find their ultimate fulfillment in Christ, not in a physical or political restoration of Israel:
    • Galatians 3:16 (KJV): “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.”
    • God’s kingdom is spiritual, not based on geopolitical borders:
      • John 18:36 (KJV): “My kingdom is not of this world.”

4. The Church’s Response to Modern Israel

Discernment, Not Blind Support

  • Many Christians have been conditioned to believe that supporting modern Israel is synonymous with supporting God’s plan. However, Scripture calls for discernment:
    • Romans 2:28-29 (KJV): “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly… But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit.”
    • True Israel, in the New Testament sense, consists of those who have faith in Christ.

Call to Repentance

  • The Church should call all people, including modern Israel, to repentance and faith in Christ:
    • Acts 3:19-20 (KJV): “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.”

Love Without Compromise

  • Supporting Israel does not mean endorsing sinful behavior. True love involves speaking the truth and urging repentance:
    • Ephesians 4:15 (KJV): “But speaking the truth in love.”

5. Conclusion

The widespread immorality in modern Israel, such as the promotion of homosexuality, is another indicator that the nation is not living under God’s covenant blessings. The claim that God would overlook such sin and restore the land to a nation in rebellion contradicts both the character of God and the teachings of Scripture.

Under the new covenant, God’s promises are fulfilled in Christ, and blessings come through faith in Him. The modern state of Israel, like all nations, is accountable to God’s moral law and cannot expect divine favor while rejecting Him and promoting sin. The Church’s role is to call all people to repentance and faith, aligning with God’s truth rather than human traditions or political ideologies.

image_pdfView as PDFimage_printPrint this Article

infocache

Back To Top